(A118) Evidence-Based Disaster Medicine: What Can We Learn from a “Science” Spread across 900 Journals?

Abstract

IntroductionDisasters and large-scale crises continue to increase in frequency. To mitigate the potential catastrophes that confront humanity in the new millennium, an evidence-based approach to disaster medicine is required urgently. This paper moves towards such an approach by identifying the current evidence-base for disaster medicine.MethodsUsing a search strategy developed by the Cochrane Prehospital and Emergency Health Field, three independent reviewers searched the electronically indexed database MEDLINE (January 2000 – August 2010) to identify peer-reviewed literature relevant to disaster medicine. Reviewers screened the titles and abstracts identified by the search strategy and applied predetermined criteria to classify the reported publications for date, source and study type and topic.ResultsA total of 8149 publications were identified. Of these, 8% focused on mitigation, 22% on preparedness, 19% on response and 51% on recovery. The publications were overwhelmingly anecdotal or descriptive (89%) while 5% were quantitative studies and 6% used qualitative methodologies. Only 66 of these publications were classified as being high level evidence. The publications were published in 928 journals, of which 34% were mental health related journals and 28% were public health journals. The journal “Prehospital and Disaster Medicine” had the greatest number of publications (5%) of all journals publishing on issues within the scope of disaster medicine. The events with the greatest numbers of publications were the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, the Indian Ocean Tsunami, and the conflict in Iraq. Of note, this search highlights the lack of publications reporting on the application of evaluation tools or frameworks.ConclusionGiven that the “science” of disaster medicine is spread across over 900 different journals, keeping on top of the evolving evidence-base of this emerging discipline will continue to be a challenge. Furthermore, the overall low quality of the evidence is an ongoing concern.